Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

1212224262760

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,523 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    Incidentally, the real danger is probably from Fianna Fáil, rather than Ross. FF will eventually run the Ministry again, and they're the ones who keep asking about mandatory hi-viz. No party will allow Ross within an ass's bray of the levers of power again, if they can help it.

    One can only hope that EU law will supersede Irish law on the topic before it ever comes up. Laws designed by countries who have a rational grown up attitude to all road users, not just motorists


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    pablo128 wrote: »
    I agree.

    And in regard to walkers? Don't you think it's a good idea to wear hi viz walking along dark roads?
    Not really, it adds very little and if a driver is using their lights correctly, and dimming when they see the other road user, they disappear. A flashlight makes far more sense but then when I drive in the country I don't fly around at 80kmph. I drive at a speed that allows me to stop in the road I see to be clear. I often see pedestrians with no lights or hi vis before I reach them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,023 ✭✭✭Donal55


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    I don't think it adds much at all if the walker has a flashlight. If you're talking about night, all the jacket adds is a few reflective strips, as the fluorescent part does nothing once the sun is gone (no UV component in artificial light to make the material fluoresce).

    I've walked on country roads at nights with just a flashlight. It's absolutely fine. I wouldn't be bothered bringing extra clothing with me, except to keep dry or warm.

    Probably the same reason why Audax Ireland have the reflective sam browne belt plus lights as requirements on their overnight rides.

    The belt does the same job.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Yeah, Sam Brownes do much the same job at night really. And fold up and fit in a pocket neatly.

    I have a repurposed Sam Browne that I use to keep my mini messenger bag closed and to add a small bit of "top" to the bike image generated by reflectors and lights. I keep it in the messenger bag, so I'd almost certainly use it if I was walking rural roads at night these days, in addition to a flashlight.

    But if I didn't have it, I'd still be happy to walk with just the flashlight.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,869 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    There's more than enough little reflective detail in my various garments without having to resort to nonsense builders high viz. That and I have lights that meet the minimum standards of Germany which we should adopt here as minimum standards to be honest.

    As people above have noted, the RSA giving out high viz and crap lights just adds to the problem.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Yeah, as we were discussing here very recently, the minimum legal specification for lights has gone without an update since the 60s (apart from making flashing lights legal). Adopting the German standards probably would be a good idea.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Donal55 wrote: »
    Probably the same reason why Audax Ireland have the reflective sam browne belt plus lights as requirements on their overnight rides.

    The belt does the same job.
    Off topic but since when? I rode plenty of overnights and all that was required was that we follow the law. Good lights and working brakes were the only things that were checked. A few organisers insist on mudguards as a courtesy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,023 ✭✭✭Donal55


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Off topic but since when? I rode plenty of overnights and all that was required was that we follow the law. Good lights and working brakes were the only things that were checked. A few organisers insist on mudguards as a courtesy.

    Its in the rules now.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    Shane Ross may be the most useless Minister for Transport ever, but he'll be a real boon to the high-vis manufacturing industry if he makes it mandatory for every motorist, bus passenger and train passenger to wear one.

    Do we manufacture these in Ireland?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Donal55 wrote: »
    Its in the rules now.
    3. For night riding front and back lights are mandatory. Riders must also wear a reflective vest, Sam Browne, sash or similar. This applies to ALL events of 300kms or more, at any time of year.
    http://www.audaxireland.org/audax/rules/

    I remember reading a forum thread somewhere else (USA) about night cycling in Audax, and the group wanted people to wear Sam Brownes. I got the impression it was fairly standard there for Audax.

    High visibility manufacturers are headquartered in Ireland, but not sure they actually make them here.

    E.g.:
    Headquartered in Westport town, Portwest manufactures high-visibility clothing, flame resistant garments, footwear and other protective gear at its facilities in Bangladesh.
    http://www.mayo.ie/news/the-new-owners-of-westport-house-have-bought-an-australian-workwear-brand-for-e7-5m/


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Donal55 wrote: »
    Its in the rules now.

    That looks like they just copied the ACP rules for riding in France, rather than have rules for here. It is the law over there to wear hi vis at night time and you will get in trouble for not doing so. I have never seen or heard of it being enforced over here but I haven't been out for a year or two so maybe things have changed. Good to know if I start back.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    CramCycle wrote: »
    That looks like they just copied the ACP rules for riding in France, rather than have rules for here. It is the law over there to wear hi vis at night time and you will get in trouble for not doing so. I have never seen or heard of it being enforced over here but I haven't been out for a year or two so maybe things have changed. Good to know if I start back.

    Yeah, but outside towns only, I think (obviously, that's the relevant bit for audax, I guess!):
    Obligation pour tout cycliste circulant hors agglomération, de nuit ou de jour si visibilité mauvaise , de porter un gilet rétro-réfléchissant à partir du 1 septembre 2008.

    The bit in bold means when you pass the sign for the town with the red line through it, I think.
    I'd heard it was not enforced, but I could be misinformed.

    (There's no requirement to have a fluorescent garment, just retroreflective, so a Sam Browne seems to be fine.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,517 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    Do we manufacture these in Ireland?
    Might be a rhetorical question, but I think there's a place in Mayo. I think the RSA also have buildings in Mayo...
    tomasrojo wrote:
    Yeah, Sam Brownes do much the same job at night really. And fold up and fit in a pocket neatly.
    I'd actually have marginally less of an issue if the proposal was about reflective detail/ Browne belts, or reflective ankle and/or arm bands. I'd still disagree with making them mandatory, but the fecking obsession with builders vests is nonsence for night time - flourescent doesn't bloody work at night!
    pablo128 wrote:
    And in regard to walkers? Don't you think it's a good idea to wear hi viz walking along dark roads?.
    I'd definitely put a decent torch above a builders vest, or really anything on the torso.

    The focus on "hi viz" is essentially around mandatory builders vests. I could kind of see the point if it was a discussion about reflective material, such as Sam Browne or arm/ leg bands (4 for under a fiver regularly in lidl and aldi!).

    Rural night time cycling, in addition to lights, I usually use reflective ankle bands. If I'm running, I usually go ankle and a head torch.

    When I'm just walking, I've never had an issue with just a torch tbh - cars dip and/or indicate, so pretty sure they can see me. With just a builders vests, vehicles coming from both directions so everyone on dipped, even those with two working headlights would make me less visible in my experience as a driver.

    The focus should be on lights and torches, and not the crap ones the RSA give out!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,282 ✭✭✭07Lapierre




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    To quote an old advertising slogan “Be safe, be seen”


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,371 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Again though, as described here, Hi Vis gives a false sense of security. On a country road, two cars approaching from different directions late at night dim their lights for each other. Anyone in hi Vis is no more visible than someone in Camo gear now. Whereas if they had lights, the change in illumination from the car lights would have no bearing, possibly making them even more visible once the approaching car dimmed its lights.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,282 ✭✭✭07Lapierre




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭crossmolinalad


    For myself I always wear one on the bike
    If you have to buy one always take a orange one never a yellow/green one
    Couple of years ago the Dutch TNO did research on then and the orange ones came out as the best visible to wear in winter , fog ,dark and rainy conditions


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Orange is a poor colour choice if the driver approaching is colour-blind.

    Just use very good lights. They work on everyone who can legally drive. You can even wave a flashlight if you're walking and you think the driver hasn't seen you. If that doesn't work, they're not looking at the road ahead, and at least you won't die dressed like a binman.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,779 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    To quote an old advertising slogan “Be safe, be seen”

    Slogans are great for simplifying debate and ignoring actual facts, aren't they?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    "Slogans Simplify!

    "I ♥ NUANCE!"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,517 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    You can even wave a flashlight if you're walking and you think the driver hasn't seen you. If that doesn't work, they're not looking at the road ahead, and at least you won't die dressed like a binman.
    I actually make sure the torch is moving when I'm walking and cars are coming. It's part of the reason ankle bands (and pedal reflectors) are more effective than torso as well - something moving vertically is more likely to be noticed than something static.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Yeah, there was some Australian study where they found that knee and ankle reflectors were much more effective than jackets.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    Slogans are great for simplifying debate and ignoring actual facts, aren't they?

    Wasn't that slogan directed at using those new fangled light things on cars, back when they thought they'd never catch on?


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    I see even Minister Ross isn't immune to the safety fallacy.
    “I am of the view that despite certain obstacles, this measure is worth pursuing, if it could save even one life.

    Jesus wept.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,282 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    IMO, This article sums it up pretty well....

    "The only thing Ross has achieved is to prove empty vessels make most noise"

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/the-only-thing-ross-has-achieved-is-to-prove-empty-vessels-make-most-noise-36204727.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,779 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Grassey wrote: »
    Wasn't that slogan directed at using those new fangled light things on cars, back when they thought they'd never catch on?

    I've only seen it used in classic victim-blaming mode, where it attacks cyclists and pedestrians for not being visible to the speeding drivers who are updating their Facebook status.

    I suppose something like 'Be safe - create an environment and culture where people can walk and cycle without being treated as 'strange people' and without having to wear specialised industrial clothing' just doesn't roll off the tongue quite so easily.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,412 ✭✭✭bladespin


    To quote an old advertising slogan “Be safe, be seenâ€

    Slogan for all - "use your effing eyes"
    Would save a lot more lives.

    MasteryDarts Ireland - Master your game!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    or "Use Common Sense...." *






    *runs from can of worms


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    bladespin wrote: »
    Slogan for all - "use your effing eyes"
    Would save a lot more lives.

    Indeed. But you must allow for the stupidity of other road users!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,288 ✭✭✭CantGetNoSleep


    Do we manufacture these in Ireland?

    He'll make sure you need to buy them from a company owned by Denis O'Brien that doesn't even exist yet


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,517 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    Grassey wrote: »
    or "Use Common Sense...." *






    *runs from can of worms
    Latest motors forum thread condoning law breaking (on many levels) --> here

    But hey, the problem is a lack of hi viz as to why vulnerable road users keep getting killed on our roads....

    Also another one asking is it ok to break red lights, and they're even talking about motorists when everyone knows it's only cyclists that jump lights!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    To quote an old advertising slogan “Be safe, be seen”
    "Watch where the **** you're going" was another good one.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "Watch where the **** you're going" was another good one.

    That’s grand as long as the other ****er is watching where they’re going.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭cdaly_


    That’s grand as long as the other ****er is watching where they’re going.

    But that's grand, hi-vis will make them watch where they're going...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    I don't think that high-vis will be effective if everyone has to wear it when outside of a building.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,869 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Indeed. But you must allow for the stupidity of other road users!

    HiViz isn't going to do anything for anyone's stupidity


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭my3cents


    I don't think that high-vis will be effective if everyone has to wear it when outside of a building.

    Why not?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭my3cents


    Weepsie wrote: »
    HiViz isn't going to do anything for anyone's stupidity

    The stupid ones will argue that they shouldn't need to wear Hi-vis and get run over so eventually we'll run out of stupid people - fat chance.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    Sure look at all those lads who blag their way into VIP events and so on, all wearing high vis. Made them invisible it did!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,841 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    my3cents wrote: »
    Why not?

    See how the hi-viz inexorably draws the eye.

    214292.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 717 ✭✭✭Phoenix Wright


    Does anyone know where it is possible to get an inexpensive hi-viz backpack cover? I find carrying around a vest to be a bit of a nuisance tbh, and ideally it would be a cover that doesn't have a huge RSA logo sticking out like a sore thumb


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    my3cents wrote: »
    Why not?
    Because everyone will be wearing it. It'll become ubiquitous and will no longer stand out.


  • Posts: 15,661 [Deleted User]


    Does anyone know where it is possible to get an inexpensive hi-viz backpack cover? I find carrying around a vest to be a bit of a nuisance tbh, and ideally it would be a cover that doesn't have a huge RSA logo sticking out like a sore thumb

    Halfords do ridge branded ones for €12 , I just have a high vis vest to cover the backpack with the straps fed through the arm holes and my OH stitched some velcro straps on to it so it doesn't flap around, one use for those I guess :pac:

    I just have to undo the velcro and pull it up to open up the bag


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Because everyone will be wearing it. It'll become ubiquitous and will no longer stand out.

    Oh right. No need for lights so, sure they become useless when every one uses them according to you.:rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Oh right. No need for lights so, sure they become useless when every one uses them according to you.:rolleyes:
    Yes. Because high-vis and lights are the same thing. :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Oh right. No need for lights so, sure they become useless when every one uses them according to you.:rolleyes:
    Actually, you have a point. Whatever about everyone having to wear high-vis when outside, everyone having to carry lights and shining them all around the place whenever outside will be a pain in the hoop.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,412 ✭✭✭bladespin


    Indeed. But you must allow for the stupidity of other road users!

    True but tgey're not the ones guiding 2 tonnes of metal, if the drivet's not looking properly then dressing like doink wont make a difference.

    MasteryDarts Ireland - Master your game!



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,510 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    CramCycle wrote: »
    And what a cluster *** that has been, no rear light requirement and a crowd of idiots driving with basically front parking lights,24 hours a day in urban environments (and motorways). It was so poorly thought out.
    stopped on the roundabout crossing the M50 tonight, behind what i think was a hire car; there were no rear lights visible on the car (i think he was on DRLs and assumed his light was on).
    i went up to his window and knocked to let him know, and in his confusion, rather than roll down the window to see what i was up to, he got out of the car - and i reckon he must have been sitting in first gear with the clutch fully pressed, because as soon as he started getting out, the car started to pull forward with him half out - one foot on the ground. it got about ten foot before he managed to get back in and stop it. luckily he was pulled up well before the lights to didn't hit anyone or roll through. that would have been an interesting one to explain.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,510 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    also, i was also just driving down a dark country road - with dipped beams - and could quite clearly see the reflective belts on the hi vis jackets the two pedestrians on the footpath a couple of hundred metres up ahead. i saw them much earlier than i otherwise would have, even with the lights dipped (the bright yellow colouring on the rest of the jacket only became visible much closer to them).
    i bloody well loathe this argument that dipped beams will not illuminate a hi-vis jacket; of course it will. if your car does not cast any light outside the 'primary' area of your dips, that implies oncoming motorists would not see your lights, which is obviously not the case.


Advertisement